About this Show

Nancy Grace

News/Business. Current trials and legal issues.

NETWORK
HLN

DURATION
01:00:00

RATING

SCANNED IN

SOURCE

TUNER

VIDEO CODEC
mpeg2video

AUDIO CODEC
ac3

PIXEL WIDTH
704

PIXEL HEIGHT
480

TOPIC FREQUENCY

Us 15, United States 9, New York 8, America 8, Obama Administration 6, U.s. 5, Brad 4, Manhattan 3, Rwanda 3, Laura 3, Devon 3, Afghanistan 3, Guantanamo 3, Guantanamo Bay 2, Mohammed 2, Bush 2, Taliban 2, Africa 2, Dallas 2, New York City 2,
Borrow a DVD
of this show
  HLN    Nancy Grace    News/Business. Current  
   trials and legal issues.  

    November 14, 2009
    10:00 - 11:00pm EST  

10:00pm
support that goal. the institute's third area of focus will be human freedom. as i said in my second inaugural address, extending the reach of freedom is the urgent requirement of our nation's security and the calling of our time. history shows that free societies are peaceful societies. governments that respect the rights of their people are more likely to respect the rights of their neighbors. young people with a voice in their future will not search for meaning in extremism. we have seen the transforming power of freedom in our lifetime, especially in you are a baby-boomer. in japan, transformed from a brutal enemy to a peace alley. and a south korea that rose from the rubble of war to a dynamic democracy. and 20 years ago this week in berlin, where people denied
10:01pm
liberty for decades, defied their oppressors and tore down the wall. there are many reasons for america's victory in the cold war, including the resolute vision of our 40th president and the steady hand of our 41st president. one crucial factor was america's support for dissidents. .
10:02pm
>> throughout my presidency, we met with families of political prisoners. the bush institute will continue this cause. we will support advocates of freedom around the globe. as a first step, we will assemble a freedom coalition, a depository of memoirs of letters from democratic activists. the freedom collection will be on line for the world to see. among the leaders to have agreed to participate or the president of liberia. the founder of iran's
10:03pm
revolutionary guard, who became an advocate for democratic change. a man who spent 10 years in eight gulag. we will send a message to dissidents and underground preachers and political prisoners around the world, we hear your voice, and as you stand for your freedom, free people will stand with you. i am also pleased to announce the bush institutes's first fellow in human freedom. for decades, he and his fellow colombians suffered under a brutal terrorist network. more than 12 million people in 40 countries turned out for rallies to proclaim no more
10:04pm
farq. it is in retreat, and the colombian people are better off. as part of this fellowship, a conference will be organized to bring together -- to bring together dissidents from around world to share lessons on using the internet to promote democratic change. the institute's's area of focus will be economic growth. i believe the role of government is not to create wealth but to create the conditions that allowed entrepreneurs and innovators to thrive. i believe in the power of free enterprise, which made the decision i face last fall were the most difficult of my presidency. i went against my free-market instincts and approved a temporary government intervention to unfreeze the credit market so we could avoid a major global depression.
10:05pm
as the world recovers, we will face the temptation to replace the risk and reward model of the private sector to find instruments of government spending and control. history shows that the greater threat to prosperity is not too little government involvement, but too much. the bush institute will devote itself to promoting economic growth at home and abroad. one of our first project will be to convene a task force of leading economists to promote free trade. trade has been one of the world's most powerful engine for economic growth and one of the most effective ways to lift people out of poverty. a 60-year movement toward trade liberalization is under threat. the bus institution task force will analyze the opportunities it can create for american
10:06pm
workers and developing nations in the future. another key ingredient to economic growth is clean, -- reliable energy supply. thanks to advances in drilling technology, america's natural gas reserves have expanded by 35% thus far. america has enough natural gas to last us an estimated 90 years. this is a hugely important developments. natural-gas is a cleaner burning fuel that can generate electricity, power machinery, and run vehicles. all of it will be domestic reproduced. next april, the bush institute will collaborate with the mcgwire energy institute of smu cox business school to host a conference titled natural gas nation. experts from around the country will explore the economic, environmental, and national security consequences of the boom in natural-gas.
10:07pm
the congress will help educate americans on these dramatic new discoveries and point the way toward stronger, cleaner economic growth for america and the world. with those four areas of focus, the bush institute will prioritize involvement from two important groups, social entrepreneur is and women. just as business entrepreneur is pioneer new ideas to create jobs, social or entrepreneurs find innovative ways to turn around lives. we will conduct research on best practices and shine a spotlight on successful agents of change, including faith based organizations. next year the institute will host a conference on social entrepreneurship and we will present an award honoring an organization that has achieve
10:08pm
outstanding results in areas such as mentoring the children of prisoners, assisting attics in recovery, or combating sex trafficking. laura and i believe that women are powerful catalyst for social change. the bush institute will include an ongoing initiative to encourage and empower women in many different fields, saving the lives of new mothers in africa, to supporting women entrepreneurs here in america and around the world to encourage women reformers. i strongly believe women will lead the democracy movement in the middle east, and they will have an ally in the bush institute. i am excited about our women's initiatives, in part because we have a dynamic leader. ladies and gentlemen, laura bush. [applause]
10:09pm
>> thank you all. thanks, everyone. thanks, everybody. georgia and i are very enthusiastic about every part of the institute, but i am especially excited about the women's initiative. it will focus on advancing social and economic opportunities for women and girls around the world. it will be integrated into every part of the institute's's focus. education and literacy, global health, human freedom, and economic empowerment. george and i believe that women play a vital role in affecting peace, health, education, and prosperity. we know that women are leading advocates for issues that
10:10pm
concern us all, particularly health and education. mothers everywhere want their children to be educated, to grow up healthy and safe, and to have better opportunities as adults. research shows that when you educate and empower women, you improve nearly every other aspect of society, and as the great egyptian poet said, when you educate a woman, you create a nation. i look forward to working with the ambassador aren't women's health issues, particularly maternal health, educating women during pregnancy and childbirth is an opportunity to discuss newborn care, nutrition, and the importance of hand washing to prevent disease. it is also chance to offer screenings such as hiv aids and breast cancer. each year, more than 1 million people worldwide are diagnosed with breast cancer.
10:11pm
many live in countries where the disease carries a stigma and shame. but thanks to global partnerships for breast cancer awareness and research in europe, latin america, and the middle east, there are some great signs of progress. one woman i met in saudi arabia is living proof of a survivors power to speak out and save lives. in a culture where many women were ashamed to say the word breast, she is one of the first saudi women to talk about her experience with the disease. she uses her weekly radio address and column to discuss her struggle with breast cancer, and she continues to share her story in books and television interviews. when women have access to education and health care, they not only improve the well-being of their own family, but they improve the well-being of their
10:12pm
communities and their countries as well. as one woman in saudi arabia told me, i am only one lawman, but together, we are a force to be reckoned with. women have played a critical role in the revitalization of rwanda in the 15 years since the genocide. women there have become leaders in every field, and more than half of the members of rwanda's parliament are women. in the world bank 2010 report, rwanda was ranked the leader for developing economies as the place to do business. in september, i met with a group of rwandan businesswomen who were here in dallas participating in a leadership forum. their businesses range from a hardware store to a travel agency to a fitness center to a book distributor, but the impact of their commitment to progress and prosperity in their communities is the same.
10:13pm
they are furthering the stability and economic growth of their countries. in many parts of the world today, women are lifting their voices and asking to be heard. in 2006, a kuwaiti woman spoke out with a compelling message. half a democracy is not a democracy. later that year, women gained the right to vote and run for office in kuwait. i met with women who had run for office in the very first round of elections since suffrage. none had been elected, but in the second round of elections since suffrage, just last may, for women were elected to serve in the kuwaiti parliament. mothers in africa are making great strides to combat hiv aids and malaria. afghan girls are back in school, and women are leading dissident
10:14pm
movements in burma and iran. these are the signs of change brought about by women. i am proud to stand with these women, and we look forward to supporting them and many others for the women's initiative at the bush institute. the institute will form partnerships with women educators, political leaders, health professionals, an entrepreneurs all over the world. especially with women in the middle east. earlier this year, george and i met with a group of iraqi women who travel to dallas as part of the state department international visitors program. they included a lawyer, journalists, and political leaders from provinces throughout iraq. they shared their stories of struggle. one iraqi woman told us that her one regret was that her parents had not lived to see the end of tyranny in her country. we invited women smu professors
10:15pm
of law, history, women's studies, an anthropology to attend the meeting. we believe that this type of partnership with smu will be " beneficial to the university and to the bush institute. the women of afghanistan are tasting freedom for the first time since the fall of the taliban. last year i visited a province that has a female governor and met women police officers who were patrolling areas all over their state that once was controlled by the taliban. their courage is replicated by countless other afghan women who are determined to help their country succeed. the stark contrast between their lives and our lives horrifies many americans, and has given birth to strong friendships between american women and our
10:16pm
afghan sisters 8,000 miles away. that is why i am happy to announce that the bush institute will host the u.s.-afghan women's council at smu next march. our meeting will focus on the vital role of women in reaching the goal of global literacy. i hope this meeting will remind the world of the stakes in afghanistan. as one of afghan -- as one afghan woman parliamentarian told me, this is our only chance, and if we do not make it this time, there will not be another. like changing projects like these are the reason george and i will be personally engaged in every aspect of the presidential center. thanks to everyone who is here today. thank you for your support of the bush institute, and we look forward to our work ahead. [applause]
10:17pm
>> i hope you can tell that laura and i have worked hard to design a unique and active presidential center. the center will be the focus of our attention, the place where we pursue our passions, and the forum for our public service as long as we live. bringing the division to life will require the generosity of friends throughout the country, and we are very grateful to all who have contributed so far. thanks to your support, we are ahead of schedule in our fund- raising goal. the truth is, we have a ways to go. we hope all who believe in the principles i have outlined today
10:18pm
will contribute what you can. if your interested, please visit our website and become a charter member. nearly a century ago, a visionary church and community founded this university to be a place of learning, debate, and innovation. today, their dream is a reality, and we are really proud to call smu home. the bush center will be a dynamic partner in helping smu continue to achieve its rightful status as a national university of excellence. it will be a constructive member of a bargain dallas community and contribute to a national dialogue and a positive way for years to come. over the past months, i have had a little time to reflect on my
10:19pm
years in office. there were some good days, and there were some tough days, but every day i was honored to represent a nation i love. i gave the job myall. i always did what i believed was then the best interest of our country, and i came home to texas with my values intact. [applause] laura and i will be forever thankful for the support and prayers that sustained us on this journey. we look forward to the import of work ahead, and thank you for coming today. may god continue to bless the united states of america.
10:20pm
[applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] >> still to come, a discussion on attorney general eric holder's announcement to hold civilian trial support 9/11 plotters in new york city. after that, today's memorial service for pulitzer prize winner jack nelson. later, another chance to see former president george w. bush reflect on his a-year presidency and decisions made during his administration. the u.s. house is back in session tomorrow at 2:00 eastern
10:21pm
for legislative business. live coverage of the house is on c-span. the senate also returns tomorrow, continuing work on fiscal year 2010 federal spending for the veterans department and military construction. majority leader harry reid has said the senate may began its healthcare debate later in the week. the senate will gavel in at 2:00 p.m. eastern. live coverage on c-span2. >> c-span's 2010 student camp contest is here. the top prize is $5,000. just create a five-eight minute video on one of our country's greatest strengths are a challenge the country is facing. it must show varying points of view. the deadline is january 20. winning entries will be shown on c-span. grab a camera and get started.
10:22pm
>> a discussion now on eric holder's announcement to hold civilian trial for the 9/11 plotters in new york city. from this mornings "washington journal," this is about 40 minutes. conspirators. host: sir, your thoughts about the attorney general's announcement yesterday guest: i think it's a profound mistake. i don't understand why anybody would think it's in the best interest of the people of the united states to bring these people on to our soil, into our courts and potentially into our prisons there after. i'm not sure whose interest the administration thought it was serving. as far as i'm concerned, the military commissions down in guantanamo are more adequate for
10:23pm
these trials. guest: i'm going to have to disagree with brad. it's clear our civilian courts are the proper courts to try these cases. if you look at the regular federal courts, they have proven they are up to this challenge. since september 11th, they have secured 195 convictions. the federal courts are the place to seek justice in these cases. the victims of 9/11 will see justice done in our regular federal courts. host: why do you think moving this process to a civilian court will move this along? guest: our courts have proven they have the tools to deal with these cases and sensitive and classified information. they have the classified
10:24pm
information procedures act which they've used successfully. the case also be tried in a manner that will allow the american public to have far greater access. host: why weren't these men, brad, brought to trial sooner under the bush administration? guest: most of the time under the bush administration, they were being regarded as terror information as opposed to prisoners. these folks were being interrogated. intelligence was being brought out rather than meeting out
10:25pm
justice. that was a second act. host: was there not enough information coming out to put a case together and bring them to trial? they were in cussed toy for better than six or seven years? guest: there's plenty of evidence against them separate and apart from what was taken from them during the investigation, which many people are critical of because of water boarding and the like. the issue was obtaining intelligence.
10:26pm
they made very good use of the intelligence during the time they were being held. once mossoui's intelligence value ended, they moved him on to be tried. host: here with our two guests. if you want to get involved in our conference call us.
10:27pm
can these gentlemen get a fair trial in new york, devon? guest: i think they can. it is a unique situation where you have a high profile case. the courts are used to dealing with these types of cases and securing a fair jury pool. not only will they get a fair trial but the world will know that the result is credible. the american people will know the result is credible. the victims of 9/11 will know justice was done. host: why do you believe that the result also be more credible than in a military tribunal? guest: we have taken three shots at the military commissions
10:28pm
first when they were established in 2001, they westbound knocked down. then they tried again in 2006. they are taking another stab in 2009. the american justice system is tried and proven. host: how do you feel about the validity in a trial in a military tribunal versus the american justice system. guest: i will agree with devon. the american justice system is the gold standard.
10:29pm
the real problem is that what we have done by taking these people out of the military system and into the military system is we have to bring them into the united states and outfit them with a set of legal rights that they did not have until this decision, constitutional rights, statutory rights. how are we going to protect the judge and jury? the judge that sat on the first world trade center bombing trial had to have a personal security detail for more than a decade after that trial. are we going to there are enormous practical problems with bringing these folks here and giving them legal rights of americans. host: our first call comes from
10:30pm
tom on our line for republicans from illinois. caller: from the gentleman you have there, when the first bombing of the towers happened, and we put them on trial, that enraged the terrorist community, and that actually lead to 9/11. the other thing is, how are you going to try these guys? you have not read them their miranda rights. you got his computer without getting a search warrant. how are you going to keep getting that evidence in court if you are going to try them like anybody else who is a citizen? i think this was purely political on obama and holder to try to get to george bush and dick cheney.
10:31pm
i think this would just enrage the terrorist community. it will just be a circus. circus. they will stand up every other day yelling "alla akbar." it's going to be a circus. host: devon, why don't you react? guest: it's a valid concern. our courts have dealt with these issues. they will deal with these issues in this case. as far as the defendants to get more or less rights in a federal courts, i'm not sure how true that will be. the courts have clearly establishes that the
10:32pm
constitution does apply to detainees in guantanamo. it's clear the military decision will be subject to appeal. i'm not sure that it is right that detainee also get more in the realm of rights if you bring them to try in regular federal court than if you bring them to trial in a military commission. host: do we know at any point if these detainees have been mirandized? could this become a technicality they are released on? guest: it's true that they were detained for intelligence purposes which is allowable. the evidence obtained under
10:33pm
torture is not admitable. there are other ways of finding evidence. we know for some, there was evidence before he was even taken into cussed toy. he was in fact indicted in the united states before he was even taken to guantanamo. . . .
10:34pm
>> we cannot have a trial now because the terrorists are going to come and get us. president bush in 2004 ran on "the terrorists are going to come and get us." you tried to do that in 2008. finally, it did not work. now you are telling us you cannot bring these people to justice in the very state, the very city where they killed almost 3000 people. we cannot bring them to trial in the american way in the place they did their dirty deed. you are saying we cannot do it because the terrorists are coming to get us. it is too dangerous. sir, what are you afraid of? iveragetsdz guest: is the point that the threat for milton islam, from al qaeda, for people like mohammed is not real?
10:35pm
that there isn't a reason to fear these people? we've had what appears to be another intans of mass murder in fort tood committed by someone who shared the agenda of these people. it is not fear mongering to take a look at the threats we face, to take those threats seriously and to meet them. so i object to the notion that any time anybody talks about al qaeda, talks about security concerns, talks about risks to the american public, that that's somehow manufacturerd, politicized, and mere fear mongering, rather than a mere effort to keep people safe. i know the people i worked with in the bush administration when i was served were genuinely concerned about protecting our citizens. they may have made some mistakes, but it was perfectly honest. and i am not saying to take the caller's other point that we
10:36pm
cannot try these people in an american court. i have great confidence in the system. the prosecutors are some of the best trial lawyers in the country. i think we can have a trial. i think the trial probably will result in a conviction. that's not my objection. the real question you have to ask yourself is whether the costs and burdens and problems associated with a trial of that kind are worth it, whether that's a superior option to the option that had previously been select ford these folks in the military commission. and i think the military system is the right system in which to try these folks. both systems are good. host: next up, robert out of indiana. caller: good morning. let's see here. people i think in this country are beginning to get a little wiser about this topic. terrorism has been around for a
10:37pm
long time. it's been around pretty much forever. and people like you and other people on your side want to change this country fundamentally just because of what happened, i don't want to say just because. of what happened on 9/11. and people aren't willing to give up human rights. every human on this earth has. just because -- i keep same just because. because of what happened on 9/11. which was a terrible thing. and people just don't want to -- you seem to pick and choose and we know about the industrial terror complex and we just want to be wise about this, and you have to give humans the rights. guest: i think it's not right that republicans or the bush administration or people who take a relatively hawkish view of how to deal with the threat of international terrorism
10:38pm
stemming from militant islam want to fundamentally change the country. my motivations at least are exactly the opposite. i want to preserve the country, preserve its liberties and freedoms, and these folks, people like ca lead shake mohammed are one of the greatest threats. we have to reduce that threat and meet it and tackle it. and something like military commissions, these are time tested tools for dealing with war criminals, which is exactly what he is. he was waging an illegal war against the united states, he targeted civilians, took thousands of civilian lives. she a war criminal. ever since the -- he is a war criminal. ever since the lincoln wars on to world war ii, that's a system for dealing with war criminals. i don't want to see anybody's human rights or civil rights
10:39pm
reduced or eliminated. but it's also important to keep in mind the human rights that were extinguished for all of the victims of 9/11 on that day. there were thousands of americans whose most basic right, the right to life, was taken away from them. guest: well, i think it's right that our values and the civil liberties that we enjoy in the united states and our emphasis on human rights make us stronger as a country and they in fact enhance our security. and part of that is in fact in trusting in our system of justice, which have been dealing with the issue of terrorism for some time, as the caller recognized, and have been developing mechanisms to handle these types of cases. i don't think it's correct to say that war criminals only belong in a military commission. in fact, congress has expressly given our federal criminal courts jurisdiction over war crimes in the war crimes act
10:40pm
that was established in 19 96. so i believe that the federal courts are the right place, the right forum to handle these cases, and they have the ability to do so in a manner that's fair and competent. host: it says that you have ob served military commission proceedings in guantanamo bay. correct? guest: that's correct. host: tell us what you saw and why you think that that would not have been the place to try these five alleged co-conspirtors. guest: i think perhaps one of the most startling exampleles is just how difficult it is to get down to guantanamo to observe these cases. human rights first, the organization i work for, has to have a special observer status, we have to coordinate with the military in order to get a military flight in order to get into the facility. it's very difficult for reporters to get down there. often they have to spend days longer than they would have to
10:41pm
normally because of the travel barriers getting into the base. and by bringing the detainees into new york for trial will open up those trials to the american public to truly see that justice is done. these will be a much more transparent process that they're actually held in new york, as opposed to guantanamo bay. host: back to the phones. we're talking about the future of guantanamo bay detainees and also the trial of the alleged 9/11 co-conspirtors. naples, florida. tom on our line for republicans. go ahead. caller: good morning. i think this is, this basically makes a mockry and a sham of the 9/11 commissions, the major finding out of the 9/11 commission was a demple nation that, hey, -- determination
10:42pm
that we were on the wrong footing as a nation. e we were treating these criminal terrorists as basic criminals instead of treating them as a foreign power, a foreign source of power at war with us. if we were on the wrong footing. and this decision by obama is basically a victory for the terrorists and their supporters in the aclu and the human rights groups. they were wanting this thrown into the brire patch of the court system since day one. in fact, when ksm was captain turd, he says, i'll talk to you when i get my lawyer. it's crazy. we are at war. that's the lesson of 9/11. you know, they were at war against us, we weren't at war against them. the reason why this is a sham is during the first world trade center bombing the blind
10:43pm
sheik's aclu lawyer was basically passing along secret information to the terrorists. and this can happen again whether or not we have another spy in our midsts. the whole idea of allowing these martors the opportunity to look at the new york skyline from the air and then down on the ground to see their handywork is a slap at the constitution, it's a slap at every american who witnessed that horror. and it just is a surrender in the war. host: we're going to leave it there. brad, tom brought up the blind sheik who was tried in new york. what would be the difference between this trial that the attorney general announced yesterday and the trial of the blind sheik in new york? guest: i think the caller makes a very important point in recognizing that this is a big step back toward the criminal
10:44pm
law model which was really the only model in use at the time of the blind sheik trial. and one thing that's important to realize is that some of the most prominent participants in that trial, in that prosess, including the judge, who was our most recent past attorney general, and the lead prosecutor both are of the view that even though civilian courts are capable of dealing with problems of this kind, that it is a very big mistake to look at them as the primary means of doing so, and that you really do need a military adjunct. both who come out of the civilian system favor the use of military commissions. and there is a really good book called willful blindness explaining just what some of the problems were with the criminal law model rather than the law of war model and some of the disabilities and problems that we faced as a
10:45pm
country by failing to recognize country by failing to recognize that we were host: now that the obama administration wants to put them on trial in new york and those on the coal bombing in front of a u.s. military commission, what does it say for the future of the rest of the ambassadors at for guantanamo bay. guest: the obama administration has not turned its back on the military commission. that seems to be drawn is that people who commit acts of terrorism here on u.s. soil will be put into civilian court, and people who attacked targets abroad like the indices' and the u.s. cole will be kept in the military system and tried under
10:46pm
military commissions. it creates an extraordinarily perverse incentive. then you get a civilian trial with all the rights pertinent to a civilian trial and you get what the criltics say is a second class form of justice and you're stuck in guantanamo if you're only successful in hitting us abroad. host: your thoughts on the way it seems how the administration is going to split the prosecution of the folks in guantanamo bay guest: well, i'd like to respond to the point of whether or not what is it that the defendants want in this case, and what are they seeking. i think what you have seen from a number of those statements and from the transcripts of the combatant status tribunal of some of the defendants is in fact what they're seeking is a combatant status which is exactly what the use of a military commissions gives
10:47pm
them. it elevates them to the level of warrior. and what you have seen in the criminal justice system in the regular federal criminal courts in cases such as reed, the convicted shoe bomber case, you see the judge after that case telling reed, you are not a warrior. i'm not going to elevate you to the status of warrior that you seek. you are not on the level with the warrior such as the warriors that fight in defense of the united states, you're just a criminal. and it denies those defendants the warrior status that they in fact seek by bringing them into the criminal justice system, which admittedly is only one of the many counter terrorism tools that the united states needs to employ. there are instances this which the use of the military are appropriate, in which the intelligence agencies are appropriate. we learned a lot of lessons after 9/11 about the need for better communication and cooperation between law enforcement and the intelligence community. but the use of the criminal justice system is in fact a
10:48pm
very important counter terrorism tool that the administration should be employing to the extent that it can in order to combat terrorist threats. host: what about the other detainees in guantanamo bay? does the announcement of the trials for the 9/11 co-conspirtors and the cole co-conspirtors, does that signal to you that the administration is trying to move this process forward, get these detainees through some sort of judicial process so that they can ultimately close down guantanamo bay? guest: yes. i do think the administration is making progress towards the closure of the guantanamo bay facility. remember that there are approximately 90 detainees that in fact have been cleared for release in guantanamo and the administration needs to continue to work with our allies in order to ensure that those individuals can be repate traited or transferred for resettlement. so there are a number of obstacles beyond simply the rile aspects to closing the
10:49pm
facility and ensuring that detainees either face their day in court if they have committed a crime of terrorism or that they're transferred for resettlement or repate traited elsewhere. host: you have a law degree from the georgetown university law center. and brad is a former associate white house counsel with the bush administration from 2001 to 2003. he is currently a partner in the dc office of sidney austin and has his law degree from harvard. back to the phones. stanford, florida. caller: yes. how are you doing, sir? host: go ahead. caller: i'd just like to state that obama administration is showing the world that america won't back down off of no situation. by bringing these guys to trial
10:50pm
he is showing the american people that we are a strong nation and we can take care of our own. i think it's great that he is doing that. that way it will show the american public and the people around new york that it would be a fair trial and so what that they are flying over seeing where they bombed and their handiework. a lot of people have killed in this nation and got off with it in a couple of years and went back. so that's not no big issue there. the issue is getting them to trial and taking them out. that's the issue. host: thank for your call. guest: i think one of the first thing that is the defense lawyers are going to do is to try to get the trial moved out of lower manhattan precisely for the reasons we've all been discussing. it's so close and so many people in the jury pool will be
10:51pm
affected by it. it's impossible to predict how the judge is going to rule. but when people talk about the circus that this will become is in the first ring is the fight whether this trial can take place in southern manhattan or whether, despite attorney general holder's carefully considered decision to venue the trial there it's going to get moved by a judge somewhere else. i don't think that this is going to be perceived by our terrorist adversaries around the world as an act of strength by the obama administration. quite the opposite. i think it's going to be perceived as an act of weakness and a reversion to the approach that we took prior to 9/11. it's obviously impossible for any of us to know for sure how mohammed feels this morning. but i suspect that rather than feeling disappointed, i suspect thee is elated at going to manhattan and having a huge and visible forum for his outbursts and rantings and performances
10:52pm
during the course of what he will regard as a trial that is mostly designed prior to his inevitable martyrhood to show the world what he is all about and advertise his cause. host: next up, brian on our line for independents. caller: i had a couple quick question force you. what exactly is it that why are we going to bestow to these people the rights that we fight for under our constitution, the very thing that makes us the beautiful country and beautiful people we are that they so much seek to destroy? and how is it that they are possibly going to get this fair trial like you were saying in lower manhattan? who in their right mind is going to sit on a jury in new york and give these guys a fair shake? guest: i think that, and i think to refer to the previous
10:53pm
caller's discussion about why this decision to bring these defendants to trial in the united states is a demen stration of strength and confidence in our justice system and what the american people stand for, what our values are. this is really about the american people and the types of due process we require because we believe in a fair justice system. and it's what our criminal justice is based on. and i think that's what we're going to see vetd in these trials. we're going to see the 9/11 defendants brought to justice in a system that stands true to american values and the american criminal justice tradition that we should be so proud of and that we do in fact defend and why our military and our troops are deployed abroad is in fact to defend these very principles and the systems of justice into which we're going to see the 9/11 defendants
10:54pm
brought host: we've got a tweet from who knew too addressed to you, brad. it says you said earlier you didn't know whose interest the administration had in mind. what are the possibilities in your mind? guest: well, i think that the administration has shown itself to be very, very sensitive to the demands and interests of groups that i consider to be on the far left of the american political spectrum as well as internationally. our critics abroad. this is an administration, if the bush administration can be faulted for being not sensitive enough to its crityickeds here and abroad, -- critics, i think the obama administration can be faulted for being too sensitive to the points of view that our international and domestic critics aspouse. and i think believe a lot of this is about appeasing the left as much about trying to make the right desession for the american people, the one
10:55pm
best calculated to produce a just verdict and keep us safe. i generally consider president obama and the people serving him to be honorable people. but this does have the whiff of politics about it. host: explain how the hamdan decision handed down by the supreme court has some sort of bearing in the situation that we find ourselves in now. guest: the history of military commissions is a long and tortrd one. it's been up to the supreme court three times. the hamdan decision was the very first decision which struck down aspects of president bush's effort to authorize military commissions by executive order. that is, without legislation by congress. and it was really the hamdan decision that forced congress to go to work and pass a law that authorized the use of military commissions that provided for the commission's procedures and the like. i think overall from a macro political perspective that was
10:56pm
not a bad thing. i think it was wise at a certain point in time for the administration to engage with the congress and have both political branches come together on an answer to this problem. indeed, i think there should be further legislation to deal with situations like this and recently the obama administration oddly enough decided it was not going to seek any further legislation creating a regime of preventive detention for terrorists but instead do what bush had done and continue to rely on the president's commander in chief powers. but hamdan was really the first time that the supreme court stepped in and forced the two political branches to get together and work on problems. host: did the hamdan decision ham string the bush administration in trying to move some of these military tribunals forward? guest: there's no question that all of the legal challenges against the military commissions and military commission trials ham strung the bush administration in trying to move this process
10:57pm
forward. had there not been all of those challenges, obviously the trials would have proceeded much sooner and much faster. that's not to say that it was wrong to bring the legal challenges. many of the challenges succeeded. and so if the supreme dourt said there was a legal defect with the original commissions, i think all of us have to accept that and to move forward. but as you evaluate the history of military commissions in the modern era now, you do have to take account of the fact that the extraordinary legal support that the imprisoned terrorists at guantanamo have received from the bar and from public interest groups here in the united states really were quite successful in grinding this effort to innovate in effect by reverting back to a previous model and adapting it. they were quite successful in halting that and impeding it. host: develop. guest: if we can go back and
10:58pm
think about why we're in this mess about why we have detainees in guantanamo that the administration is trying to resolve their cases. and i believe the reason why we're here is because guantanamo was seen as a way to take these detainees out of the rule of law and to escape the jurisdiction of the courts and to put them into what has been characterized as a legal black hole. and i think what you saw in the hamdan doosigses and other decisions were the u.s. courts saying you can't do that. you can't escape the rule of law by bringing the detainees into an offshore facilities off the shores of the united states. and if the obama administration is in fact motivated in part by wanting to demonstrate both to the american public and to the world that the -- that he is renewing u.s. commitment to the rule of law, i think that's an important motivation. i think that's a correct motivation. that's an important step to take because it's important to our relationships with our allies which are also essential to our national security and to
10:59pm
the suck says of our efforts in both -- success and in iraq and afghanistan. host: go ahead. caller: good morning. a scenario nobody seems to be talking about. in the united states, our court system, it's very possible these people go free. now, if that happens what do you think the mood of the count vi is going to be against terrorists and do you think these advocassies with their so-called justice for everybody, human rights, do you think it's going to cause some bitterness in this country? and do you think that our enemies are going to be emboldened by this? guest: i think what you will see with the detainees that are brought into the united states and face trial for terrorism crimes is not what you've seen crimes is not what you've seen over the past numbe